Originally posted by Nephthys
Mass Effect 3 Alternate Ending.Fanfiction yeah, but HOLY SHIT that woulda been a good ending.
*skip to the next paragraph to skip my whining*
I did not like the extreme atheistic perspective of the "universe"and then the multiple references to "god" in literal words. I could be wrong and took that interpretation waaaaay off. Maybe the author did that to passive aggressively paint the Reapers as blind, arrogant, evil atheists and the alliance as a hopeful somewhat theistic group? If that's the case, that's a bit ... I don't know...offensive? I am not offended but it can come off as a bit biased by singling out a group. Either way, I did not like that injection to the story. It is not needed. Leave out the "no purpose to life or the universe" stuff. Star Trek handles that type of stuff much better by acknowledging multiple perspectives and having the characters conclude that it is a combination of all of those (fits better into an idea of how diverse a multiverse really could be). Sorry to get all philosophical but that was the only thing I did not like.
Other than that, the re-write was REALLY good. I like the idea of the various "war-assets" succeeding or failing based on how well you friended them. I also like the idea of your team surviving or dying based on whether or not you completed the various missions for them.
Hell, they could have multiple endings for EACH character. Maybe like a "bad, okay, and great" ending which depends on how many side missions you completed for each faction AND side character.
Do you guys agree or disagree? Flesh our your reasons as I love talking about this.
Originally posted by dadudemon
*skip to the next paragraph to skip my whining*I did not like the extreme atheistic perspective of the "universe"and then the multiple references to "god" in literal words. I could be wrong and took that interpretation waaaaay off. Maybe the author did that to passive aggressively paint the Reapers as blind, arrogant, evil atheists and the alliance as a hopeful somewhat theistic group? If that's the case, that's a bit ... I don't know...offensive? I am not offended but it can come off as a bit biased by singling out a group. Either way, I did not like that injection to the story. It is not needed. Leave out the "no purpose to life or the universe" stuff. Star Trek handles that type of stuff much better by acknowledging multiple perspectives and having the characters conclude that it is a combination of all of those (fits better into an idea of how diverse a multiverse really could be). Sorry to get all philosophical but that was the only thing I did not like.
I agree with you here. There's no point in potentially offending people for dialog that isn't actually needed. I would stay away from religion and political views at all costs unless it is absolutely necessary.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Other than that, the re-write was REALLY good. I like the idea of the various "war-assets" succeeding or failing based on how well you friended them. I also like the idea of your team surviving or dying based on whether or not you completed the various missions for them.Hell, they could have multiple endings for EACH character. Maybe like a "bad, okay, and great" ending which depends on how many side missions you completed for each faction AND side character.
Do you guys agree or disagree? Flesh our your reasons as I love talking about this.
I think it would be great to have a bunch of endings for each character based off the players choices and everything, but I don't think it's really realistic to ask or expect something like that. It would be too much work at this point. The only way I see something like that happening is with text boxes like at the end of Dragon Age Origins.
Spoiler:
I like the idea of having Shepard debate the star kid on his views instead of mindlessly accepting them. Especially if you have worked earlier in the game to bring synthetics and organics together. The best ending could involve Shepard pointing out the unity of Quarians and Geth, and even flash a couple shots of EDI and Joker, granted the player was actually able to make both those things happen.I think the star child needs to be replaced with Harbinger, though. And I think a little bit more time should go towards better explaining the idea of harvesting organics to save them from synthetics. Why don't they just wipe out all synthetics every 50,000 years? As many people have pointed out before, the logic doesn't really make sense.
Originally posted by Nephthys
Personally I've changed my mind and now the ending I really want is the indoctrination theory.
I think so too. It seems to fit rather well, and would solve pretty much all the problems. All except all the people would be pissed that Bioware released a game that doesn't have a real ending.
I'm not really raging at the ending per se. Just the sloppiness/laziness or rushed nature of it. Doubt they'd do a "dream sequence" plot twist to it. They'll prolly just go with the current story and do a band-aid explanation to the whole thing.
IMO, the Mass Effect series deserved better than that. Sad.
Is it just me or is Blizzard gonna be LITERALLY SALIVATING over Bioware's obvious PR nightmare. Ppl will be switching to Diablo 3, and with the overall gamer expectations greatly reduced due to the ME3 ending fiasco and with tons of gamers just wanting to forget their whole ME3 ending experience, I can see that Diablo 3 will no doubt experience unprecedented success even if it's not all that good.
Originally posted by ares834
What? Diablo 3 and Mass Effect 3 aren't similar at all....
Both aren't established large fanbase-brand-name million dollar action-oriented games with strong RP/Story elements that are on their third installments? 😛
Well, I do agree that both have different appeals.
I'm just saying that once food has left a bad taste in your mouth, the plain water you use to gargle it out begins to taste quite good. I just see a lot of the disappointed ME3 players jumping into a different game just to forget their bad ending experience with ME3. I certainly see myself jumping into Diablo3 and uninstalling ME3 (not out of spite but to free up disk space) by May 15.
Originally posted by BackFire
Most ME fans would be done with ME3 by the time Diablo 3 came out anyways. One won't affect the other.
Great games normally have a cycle of longer than a few months, tbh (especially games with a coop element) and the impact of disappointment from ME3 will resonate longer than a few months as well. I guess we'll see what'll happen when Diablo 3 does come out.
Like I said, Diablo 3 is the only other solid game of note (IMHO) that is coming out after ME3. Maybe it's just me but I can really see Diablo 3 taking advantage and enjoying the lowered expectations from the disappointed ME3 playerbase.
Blizzard's timing in announcing the May 15 release date came at an advantageous moment. 😛
Urgh, I just want to thank everyone for being mature about the ending controversy no matter what you think of it. 5 minutes on the SomethingAwful forums really gives perspective. Those guys are good at LPs but my god are they a bunch of melodramatic whiney fanboys.
Also first time I've ever heard Player Choice referred to as a theme before. Thats a narrative device, not a theme dumbass. I don't know why people are so pissed at the percieved lack of choices at the end, theres just as much as in the first two. The endings bad because of the narrative failings, not any so-called restrictions of choice.
The actual themes are:
Self-Determination.
Synthetics vs Organics.
Galactic Unification (or whatever).
If I had to
Spoiler:
choose between them (I saved both), I probably would have picked the Geth, even though I love Tali and would hate to make her commit suicide. The Geth are simply in the right from a moral standpoint.Then again the Geth will die anyway when I pick the Destroy ending, so maybe not.